The continued dispute between Netanyahu and Trump may lead Israel into a strategic predicament...!

Israel is sinking day by day into a dispute with the American administration, possibly due to policies pursued by Netanyahu to remain on the prime minister's throne, regardless of the strategic damage that may befall Israel due to Netanyahu's constant policy of rejection to end wars in the region, contrary to what the Trump administration wants in line with its strategic interests in the region. It seems that Netanyahu has some personal and specific criteria for ending these wars, the most important of which are the war on Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the war on Gaza, which are among the most important points of disagreement between him and US President Trump at the current stage, even though Netanyahu considers Trump to be the American president most protective of Israel's interests, but not in the path of peacemaking and achieving stability in the region. We all observed the extent of American support for Israel during the wars it has fought and is still fighting in the region, whether the war on Palestinians in Gaza, or the war on Iran, Syria, or Hezbollah in Lebanon. The truth, as observers, is that without the military support of the Trump administration, Israel would not have been able to continue its wars until now, and this is what made Trump go too far in his statements towards Israel when he said, "If it weren't for America, Israel would not exist," but I believe this statement is somewhat exaggerated because Great Britain played the biggest role in Israel's existence and supplying it with weapons to this day. The truth is that all American presidents have contributed to providing all forms of military, intelligence, security, and political support to Israel, but the current president, Trump, is the most prominent among them.

The dispute between the two men erupted for reasons related to these wars, as Netanyahu wants the United States to continue waging war on Iran indefinitely and without Israel setting a final line, even if the Iranian regime falls. This is what Israel was betting on at the beginning of the war, but it became a bet of smoke after Iran recovered from the shock, gathered its remnants, renewed its lost leadership, cleaned its internal front from infiltration, and eliminated battalions of agents recruited by Israel to help it provide intelligence information about the leaders of the Iranian revolution, the army, and the Revolutionary Guard to eliminate the Iranian regime. Israel does not want any agreement to be signed between America and Iran before Israel achieves its strategic goals of overthrowing the Iranian regime, which Netanyahu would consider the greatest victory through which he would return to the premiership in the next Knesset elections, but not everything the winds bring is desired by the ships. In contrast, Trump believes that he has managed to eliminate the Iranian threat of obtaining nuclear weapons, and the matter ends here. He sees that the current agreement achieves significant interests for him in the region and makes America's relationship with Arab countries stronger than it was during wartime because it fulfilled the desire of many leaders of the region's countries to stop the war, which many leaders of the Arab Gulf states believe will cost their countries huge losses and stop the export of all types of energy, which is the backbone of the Gulf economy, which would hinder the prosperity and development of those countries.

What most annoyed Netanyahu regarding the framework agreement between America and Iran was the issue of Lebanon and the inclusion of a ceasefire in Lebanon and Israel's withdrawal from all Lebanese territories as a main clause in the agreement. Netanyahu fears that the negotiations that began between America and Iran, mediated by Pakistan and Qatar, will lead to a final agreement in which America ignores Israeli interests in two main issues: Iranian nuclear weapons and Iranian ballistic missiles, and thus the agreement will be at Israel's expense. This is considered by Israeli strategic circles a victory for Iran that will lead to a decline in the Israeli deterrence system in the region. Netanyahu's annoyance reached the point where the decision in Israel regarding the fronts became in Trump's hands, and this became clear after the incident of Israeli soldiers being killed by a Hezbollah Kornet missile and Trump preventing Israel from bombing the southern suburbs and obliging Israel to agree to a real ceasefire that includes southern Lebanon. Haaretz newspaper said, "Netanyahu is now facing a dilemma: either stay in southern Lebanon and risk his soldiers and his relationship with Trump, or withdraw and suffer a defeat in his political life project." This means that Israel is now in a strategic predicament that does not allow it to continue the war, nor can it stop it and withdraw from any territories it recently occupied in Lebanon, even to the extent that it cannot maintain buffer zones, in my estimation.

A strategic predicament by all measures is now taking Israel to its depths due to the dispute between the two men over the strategy of ending wars in the region, unless Netanyahu complies with the Trump administration's directives and engages in the current US-Iran agreement and accepts the American point of view to end the war with Iran and Hezbollah. In this context, US Vice President (J.D. Vance) said, "It is not necessary for American interests to always align with Israeli interests, and Trump has disagreements with Netanyahu regarding how to end the war with Iran, and criticisms of Netanyahu's decisions and policies do not mean anti-Semitism." Also, former Israeli ambassador to the United States, Mike Herzog, said, "Israel must have an interest in not cutting ties with America, and this will not turn back the US-Iranian agreement, but will only set Israel back." He added, "We are in a low strategic position when matters are decided behind our backs, dictating fateful issues to us." This gives us indications that the disputes Netanyahu has dragged Israel into with the Trump administration have become strategic, meaning that the continued deepening of this dispute may lead Israel into a strategic predicament that will not enable it to resolve the protracted wars in the region, and thus the resolution becomes in Trump's hands alone. Knesset member and Minister (Miri Regev) said, "There is a difference between the American partners, and the whole world understands the danger posed by Iran. We do not know the details of the agreement," and she suggested waiting to see the details of the agreement, but she stressed that the important thing for Israel now is that Iran not be nuclear, which, in my view, downplays the level of disagreement between Israel and the American administration. As for Minister (Ze'ev Elkin), he said, "We will do whatever is required in Lebanon, even if the price is a confrontation with Trump and the American administration." This means that Netanyahu is now in a dilemma regarding the issue of ending wars in the region, which represents a lifeline for Netanyahu from accountability. Should he end them and lose his political future, or continue them and lose American political support...!

The truth is that Netanyahu may have dragged Israel into a strategic predicament from which he does not know how to exit. The price of exiting it may be the loss of his political future and the disruption of American-Israeli relations. This predicament is manifested in the Trump administration's decision to maintain the ceasefire in Lebanon without Israel's participation, at a time when Netanyahu continues to pledge to the Israeli public to continue military action on all fronts...! President Trump made an important statement yesterday in which he said, "He knows how to resolve issues with Netanyahu," and I believe he means the Iran and Lebanon files. It seems that a common direction has emerged in Israel and the Trump administration in recent days to avoid any predicament for Israel as a result of the disagreement over how to end the wars in Lebanon, specifically by Israel withdrawing from southern Lebanon and the Lebanese army replacing the occupation forces under American supervision, provided that this achieves security and stability in the region, especially for the residents of northern Israel, through a peace agreement between Lebanon and Israel. If that happens and Netanyahu agrees to American solutions for southern Lebanon, then Netanyahu will face electoral difficulties that may not allow him to continue to sit on Israel's political throne in the next stage.